2 edits
Originally posted by menace71So am I and Id just like to say 'divesgeester still sucks', vroooooom vroooom, screeeeech of tyres, yeehaw!
I'm about to do a forum DRIVE BY ..............................................🙂
then duck out !!!!
Manny
Meanwhile at a road block Divesgeester P. Coltrane, 'them witness boys they'll be coming by here any minute, ah-hett heet, I can feel it in ma bones'.
1 edit
Originally posted by SwissGambitNo, that is not what I am saying at all. Atheists and/or theists are obviously free to butt into each others' threads. As you say, that is what public forums are for.
Basically, you're asking for atheists to butt out of inter-Christian discussions. And perhaps, vice-versa.
I am just making appeal to basically stay on topic within the parameters of the current discussion in that thread (which, I agree, may have deviated from the OP).
The example mentioned above of a philosophical discussion, say on gays or abortion should preferably discuss the merits of the case, and it should not be interrupted by: All who do this will burn in hell, which does not add any value to the discussion.
Of course, as you say, one can just ignore these posts and go on. But this is a thread on Forum Etiquette, and i pointed out that IMO this is poor FE. If this is your modus operandi (ignore inappropriate posts and go on) why be interested in Forum Etiquette at all?
-Removed-Isn't this exactly what this forum is about - to engage others on belief systems other than our own?
If we can do this with objectivity and maturity, the world will be a better place!
Unfortunately, it seems that too often it is grabbed upon by some as a means of proselytizing, more's the pity. And people tend to get very defensive and evasive if one or other of their most cherished beliefs cannot adequately be defended.
Originally posted by CalJustI basically called Grampy Bobby on his behaviour in this regard, without going off-topic or issuing any insults, and what I got in return was an unoriginal wall of copy pasted text consisting of a 'lecture' on trolls and trolling.
And people tend to get very defensive and evasive if one or other of their most cherished beliefs cannot adequately be defended.
-Removed-I have had exactly the same experience from G and RC.
In one post I asked RC for an expression of an opinion (following one of his posts) and his response was that he is only interested in discussing scripture verses, and not enter into any dialogue about anything else.
Well, that sort of limits matters and I have since then never responded to any of their posts. Personally, I have nothing against JWs, or any other sect or group for that matter, but i certainly take an issue if individuals, for their own personal reasons, wish to exclude themselves from rational debate.
Originally posted by CalJustThere have been some famous runarounds with robbie here where he would quote and interpret a scripture verse but would then, under some pressure from other posters, steadfastly refuse to state whether he agreed with the interpretation. This peculiar little example of evasion used to crop up quite regularly. Sometimes he would post the same sentence over and over again, maybe 12 or 15 times, with words to the effect of 'Have I not stated what the interpretation of the verse is? Whether or not I agree with that interpretation is irrelevant to our discussion' etc. etc. [My paraphrasing].
In one post I asked RC for an expression of an opinion (following one of his posts) and his response was that he is only interested in discussing scripture verses, and not enter into any dialogue about anything else.
Divegeester, as threadmaster of this thread, have you come to any conclusions?
First of all, how to obtain consensus on what constitutes good FE, and secondly what an appropriate punishment would be.
Here are two suggestions covering both.
Since this is a Spiritual Forum, how about applying the good OT rule of : In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall any matter be established, and as far as punishment goes, (again, since this is a chess forum) how about subtracting 20 points from the culprit's rating (hit him or her where it hurts the most!)
On that basis, and on the strength of the previous page, you could hit RC with at least 40 points!
😀
2 edits
Originally posted by CalJustSo sad, a man given to egotism, you think that Robbie Duke cares about ratings? how unsavory! take all the points you need. The whole thread is simply a bitching fest for Divesgeeeeester P Coltrane to do what he does best, bitch about other people and to encourage others like Fat Boss Hogg Bourbaki to do the same, there is not a semblance of spirituality in it and it belongs in the general forum where he and other like minded individuals can discuss personalities until their hearts are content. I have been here for a number of years and I have learned one thing from divesgeester, to stay away from him, yeehaaaaw!
Divegeester, as threadmaster of this thread, have you come to any conclusions?
First of all, how to obtain consensus on what constitutes good FE, and secondly what an appropriate punishment would be.
Here are two suggestions covering both.
Since this is a Spiritual Forum, how about applying the good OT rule of : In the mouth of two or three witnesse ...[text shortened]... asis, and on the strength of the previous page, you could hit RC with at least 40 points!
😀